Diddy is challenging his convictions for two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution by relying on the historical definition of prostitution under the Mann Act.
In a recent court filing obtained by TMZ, his attorneys pointed out that when the Mann Act became law in 1910, “a prostitute was a woman who had sex outside marriage.” They argue that understanding the law in its original context is crucial to evaluating the charges against him.
The rapper also contended that the prosecution did not prove he hired the male escorts to engage in sexual activity with his girlfriends.
According to Diddy, he only compensated them for their time, not for sex. Based on this argument, his legal team is requesting either a full acquittal or a completely new trial.
Prosecutors strongly disagreed, describing the evidence as overwhelming.
“At trial, there was ample evidence to support the jury’s convictions,” they wrote, as reported by the Associated Press.
In their filing, prosecutors detailed the influence Diddy exerted over the women involved. They explained that he “asserted substantial control over Ventura and Jane’s lives. Specifically, he controlled and threatened Ventura’s career, controlled her appearance, and paid for most of her living expenses, taking away physical items when she did not do what he wanted. The defendant similarly paid Jane’s $10,000 rent and threatened her that he would stop paying her rent if she did not comply with his demands.”
While the jury found Diddy guilty on two counts of transportation to engage in prostitution, he was acquitted of sex trafficking and racketeering charges.
Despite facing a potential prison sentence of up to 20 years, prosecutors have recommended four years. His next court appearance is scheduled for October 3rd.
Diddy’s defense strategy relies on presenting historical context as a key factor that could change the legal interpretation of his actions.
Meanwhile, prosecutors maintain that the trial evidence clearly demonstrates his guilt, leaving the upcoming hearings to determine whether his argument can succeed in obtaining a new trial or overturning the convictions.
